Tom, list,
I should look terms up once in a while instead of relying on decades-old
memories or employing the word as if Peirce's sense of it were current.
(Incidentally, the Commens dictionary has two quotes from Peirce about
instinct http://www.commens.org/dictionary/term/instinct .)
You're right insofar as instinct as currently defined responds, or is
evolved to respond, to an external situation (even if it malfunctions
and one behaves hungrily despite having eaten plenty). I'm not sure that
I'd call that always a response to an external _/trigger/_. Anyway,
what seems to count is not so much the difference from a previous actual
situation of satiety, such that the hunger is triggered by the
disturbance of that previous situation, but instead more the difference
of a current situation from the satiety that _/would/_ otherwise occur;
why not understand biological phenomena also in terms of would-be's (a
term from Peirce) and not just of actual changes of situation? There
doesn't seem to always be a prolonged food-Eden for the sufficiently
young, an Eden that gets disturbed one day by novel hunger. I've the
impression that babies in all species with caretaking mothers (or
fathers) sometimes get hungry and even fetuses may get hungry. In some
species of shark, one fetus may eat another.
Best, Ben
On 7/17/2015 11:53 AM, Ozzie wrote:
Ben, list -
Thanks for your interesting comments. I will spend more time thinking
about them later today.
Let me briefly address one sentence from your comments: "I'd say that
instincts can also be triggered _/inside/_ the body, e.g., by
prolonged emptiness of the stomach. "
According to the common definition (interpretant) instincts are
triggered by things in the external world. Before birth, food is
ALWAYS available to the baby. After birth, and assuming an attentive
mother (caregiver), food continues to be available without any effort
or reciprocation on the baby's behalf. This goes on daily for many
years, so not feeling hunger pains becomes the norm, the expectation.
Against that backdrop, when food is withheld (by the external
environment), one's sensation of hunger (-) is a disturbance to the
status quo (0), which summons the instinct to do something (+) to make
that "pain" go away. When something from the environment is eaten
(+), the sensation (-) disappears (0).
It is in this sense hunger pains and their elimination are related to
(triggered by) the individual's contact with the external world. If
the individual eats a full meal AND THEN feels hungry, I agree that
particular sensation has an *internal trigger (likely emotions or a
physical disability).
Regards,
Tom Wyrick
On Jul 17, 2015, at 8:04 AM, Benjamin Udell wrote:
Regarding some of your comments, I'd say that instincts can also be
triggered _/inside/_ the body, e.g., by prolonged emptiness of the
stomach.
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
